If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

On the declining quality of the ORG

To whom it may concern:

I'm not here to rock the boat. I've loved RedsZone for the past seven years and have posted over 4,000 times now. I've always enjoyed the camaraderie, mutual respect and knowledge of the posting population here, and I'm more than open to a good difference of opinion (though I'll do my darnedest to convince you of my point of view in a respectful way). Even more, this forum has given me confidence in my writing beyond sports -- offering a much needed break from academic writing on pretty much a daily basis since 2006.

So here's the thing. I've been really disappointed by the quality of some of the recent posts on the ORG. I know the site just underwent a massive change for posting requirements and that this may be part of why so many new sorts of posts are showing up. Without mentioning individual posters by name, it seems to me that there has to be some better way to regulate the site for quality. This has to do with both newbies who throw up unexamined, redundant or unclear topics AND with more experienced posters who set a bad example for the unititiated by writing cavalier thread titles and/or snarky responses which are based on their earned posting reputations.

Mostly, since I've found myself writing on this issue continually lately, I decided to bring the discussion to this forum rather than to continually hijack threads over there. For the record, while I believe in democratic speech, I also think that intelligent regulation can often lead to a better, more free exchange of ideas. RedsZone has long been a model of that for sports forums on the internet, and I'm worried that we're losing that.

I'm curious what the mods think and what others think, and if there is any way at all of addressing this concern. If nothing else, though, I've removed my griping from the ORG.

Thanks for your thoughts, everyone.

RedEye

Last edited by RedEye; 05-22-2013 at 03:46 PM.

"Iíll kind of have a foot on the back of my own butt. Thatís just how I do things.Ē -- Bryan Price, 10/22/2013

Likes:

Re: On the declining quality of the ORG

I had posted a concern on this earlier this morning on ORG in the Merger thread. My biggest concern at this point is that the threads are getting clogged with posts attacking the thread topic, the posters, or posts in a way which is not civil and is not contributing to the discussion overall. It makes the thread really unreadable. Even if we didn't need another thread on topic "X" or the topic may be fanciful, the criticism is not being handled well. I don't know a good solution but a number of the threads are getting unreadable (so I don't).

Likes:

I had posted a concern on this earlier this morning on ORG in the Merger thread. My biggest concern at this point is that the threads are getting clogged with posts attacking the thread topic, the posters, or posts in a way which is not civil and is not contributing to the discussion overall. It makes the thread really unreadable. Even if we didn't need another thread on topic "X" or the topic may be fanciful, the criticism is not being handled well. I don't know a good solution but a number of the threads are getting unreadable (so I don't).

Thanks to Redeye for starting this thread.

I definitely hear this concern, and I confess to being one of the attackers (though I mostly try to do it with kid gloves). There are a few recent posters, though, who seem largely impervious to the responses they get from others, and so much so that calling them "trolls" doesn't seem to be a stretch. I wonder whether there is a better way to communicate our displeasure with people beyond blocking them or PM-ing them. Thing is, I am pretty sure this is not a personal issue -- it is a very public one, and it is about wasting public airtime despite countless negative responses from other members of the community. To me, that seems like more than just bad posting -- it seems like deliberate, antisocial behavior.

Last edited by RedEye; 05-22-2013 at 03:53 PM.

"Iíll kind of have a foot on the back of my own butt. Thatís just how I do things.Ē -- Bryan Price, 10/22/2013

Re: On the declining quality of the ORG

It is true enough that there have been a number of below-average (IMO) threads started lately. However, the incessant piling on in response adds nothing. It's not a good combination.

If it can be done in jest what's the problem?

If it's done with a mean spirit then yeah it's non productive.

One thing I hate is when a user creates a thread that poses a question and then never enters the thread again to participate. If one throws a ball in the air that is covered in gunk then they should try and catch it too.

Likes:

Re: On the declining quality of the ORG

Originally Posted by RedEye

I definitely hear this concern, and I confess to being one of the attackers (though I mostly try to do it with kid gloves). There are a few recent posters, though, who seem largely impervious to the responses they get from others, and so much so that calling them "trolls" doesn't seem to be a stretch. I wonder whether there is a better way to communicate our displeasure with people beyond blocking them or PM-ing them. Thing is, I am pretty sure this is not a personal issue -- it is a very public one, and it is about wasting public airtime despite countless negative responses from other members of the community. To me, that seems like more than just bad posting -- it seems like deliberate, antisocial behavior.

The other option is the report a post function which unfortunately leads to more work for the moderators. If threads started at 4:30 in the morning to drag up a 4th thread on a topic are flagged early enough maybe they get locked and ignored sooner.

One thing I hate is when a user creates a thread that poses a question and then never enters the thread again to participate. If one throws a ball in the air that is covered in gunk then they should try and catch it too.

Exactly. Usually when you start a thread, it is because you have a topic that you legitimately want to discuss. That does not seem to be the case in the instances I am thinking about.

"Iíll kind of have a foot on the back of my own butt. Thatís just how I do things.Ē -- Bryan Price, 10/22/2013

The other option is the report a post function which unfortunately leads to more work for the moderators. If threads started at 4:30 in the morning to drag up a 4th thread on a topic are flagged early enough maybe they get locked and ignored sooner.

Okay, so flagging earlier is better? That is helpful feedback. I will do so from now on.

"Iíll kind of have a foot on the back of my own butt. Thatís just how I do things.Ē -- Bryan Price, 10/22/2013

Re: On the declining quality of the ORG

Originally Posted by RedEye

Okay, so flagging earlier is better? That is helpful feedback. I will do so from now on.

Not being a mod, I have no knowledge if flagging earlier is better but was just speculating and assuming. The report a post was all I could come up with other than putting into effect a delay on ability to start threads upon enactment of ORG status.

Re: On the declining quality of the ORG

Originally Posted by westofyou

If it can be done in jest what's the problem?

If it's done with a mean spirit then yeah it's non productive.

One thing I hate is when a user creates a thread that poses a question and then never enters the thread again to participate. If one throws a ball in the air that is covered in gunk then they should try and catch it too.

Rather than sit back and let the fur fly.

The problem is sometimes its hard to determine if its done in jest or malice. On your second point, I have been guilty of that before, the "helmets for pitchers" thread, sometimes you just can't get back to the thread, or the posters already said what you were going to.

Re: On the declining quality of the ORG

Exactly. Usually when you start a thread, it is because you have a topic that you legitimately want to discuss. That does not seem to be the case in the instances I am thinking about.

Let's not beat around the bush here: RedTruck has started a ton of topics lately that seem to serve no purpose other than to create discord. I don't spend much time reading his/her topics, but I have yet to see any participation by RedTruck other than laying the initial bait, which only confirms my suspicions. Maybe some will feel it's in poor taste to call out the poster in question, but I disagree. IMHO, the problem you've identified is real; it's affecting the entire board; but, it originates in one place. Let's not treat the symptom.

Re: On the declining quality of the ORG

Before we can discuss the seemingly intrinsic, normative definition of what appropriate ORG behavior is, we must identify the dominating fundamental group that dictates and defines what discourse is appropriate, as well as the repressive state apparatuses in place to correct users who do not consent to their idealogical state apparatuses. Who would like to begin?

Likes:

Re: On the declining quality of the ORG

Originally Posted by Larry Schuler

Before we can discuss the seemingly intrinsic, normative definition of what appropriate ORG behavior is, we must identify the dominating fundamental group that dictates and defines what discourse is appropriate, as well as the repressive state apparatuses in place to correct users who do not consent to their idealogical state apparatuses. Who would like to begin?

Ummmm, gesundheit???

"I came here to kick ass and chew bubble gum... and I'm all out of bubble gum."
- - Rowdy Roddy Piper

"It takes a big man to admit when he is wrong. I am not a big man"
- - Fletch

Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.

Thank you, and most
importantly, enjoy yourselves!

RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball